INDUSTRIAL TRAINING BOARD BILL

Order for Second Reading read.

3.00 p.m.

The Minister for Education (Dr Lee Chiaw Meng): Mr Speaker, Sir, I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read a Second time."

Sir, in 1959 when the Government embarked on transferring Singapore's economy on to an industrial base, we determined that the large proportion of the workforce would in due course be industrially employed. This meant that the development of a skilled industrial workforce would assume growing importance, as Singapore's national income became increasingly dependent on the output and productivity of industry. Industrial training has therefore been recognised as a major instrument of economic policy.

Thus, as a matter of national urgency, the National Industrial Training Council was established in April 1968 to deal with the immediate problem of developing and co-ordinating technical education and industrial training to meet this need. Two months later the Technical Education Department was specially formed within the Ministry of Education to execute the targets established by the Council. In the short space of four years, the Technical Education Department has substantially achieved the initial targets set out and laid a firm foundation for the development of a skilled industrial workforce.

Sir, I should like, at this juncture, to correct certain mis-impressions about our vocational institute graduates and the value of the training they have received, which would otherwise undermine what has so far been accomplished.

Before the new vocational institutes were established, the main supply of workers with any vocational training at all came from the vocational schools. Because of the similar name, vocational institutes have often been confused with vocational schools, which now no longer exist. This confusion is most unfortunate. Admittedly, many former vocational school students were drop-outs from the school system. The vocational institutes, on the other hand, cater for those with a reasonably high level of education who wish to learn a practical skill. Industries show a distinct preference for these graduates. The value of their training has also been recognised by the Public Service Commission.

The vocational institute graduates have been trained at heavy public subsidy specially to undertake industrial employment and I am, therefore, naturally perturbed lest doubts about their value should take hold. No effort has been spared to explain to the public, through the mass media and other means, the many developments which have taken place in industrial training since 1968. Any misconceptions and prejudices which still persist, even among a small sector of the population, could be very damaging.

The best way to stamp out these unfavourable attitudes and to ensure that training programmes receive the fullest acceptance and recognition is to develop close co-operation between the Government, industry and labour. The growth of such co-operation will become increasingly necessary in the next stage of industrial training, as it is envisaged that the further skill-development of the basic-trained worker can most effectively be undertaken by and within industry. It is for these reasons that an Industrial Training Board is being proposed to centralise, co-ordinate and intensify industrial training. A statutory board will enable industry and labour to participate more fully towards common goals. It will have more flexibility in an area where slowness to respond to changing conditions can result in high training wastage on the one hand and critical skill shortages on the other. A board will also be better able to deal with the problems of disseminating the right kind of conceptions about industrial training.

When the responsibility for industrial training becomes vested in the Board, technical education in schools will remain the responsibility of the Ministry. The Technical Education Department, with all its functions taken over, will then be dissolved.

Mr Speaker, Sir, this Bill is essentially a straightforward Bill. Its main purpose has already been outlined in the Explanatory Statement, and I do not wish to go into the details again.

While industrial training is primarily the responsibility of industry, it is imperative to ensure that national interests are served. A major function of the Board will be to encourage industry to play its proper role in the national industrial training effort.

It is envisaged that the future pattern of industrial training to be promoted by the Industrial Training Board will be as follows: -

(1) The training of operatives and artisans will gradually be transferred back to industry.

(2) On the other hand, the further development of the necessary training capacity for the required output of skilled manpower, both institutionally and within industry, will be a major preoccupation of the Board.

(3) The Board will increase the supply of persons institutionally trained up to Trade Certificate and Industrial Technician Certificate levels.

(4) The further skill-development of the basic-trained worker will be accomplished by the employer with the help of the Board through on-the-job training and, wherever possible, within the framework of an apprenticeship training scheme.

(5) The emphasis in industrial training will be placed on the attainment of recognised standards. The Government envisages that the Industrial Training Board will develop a national system of trade testing. This will not only improve the quality of training but also establish uniformity of standards within the work-force.

(6) The upgrading of adult skilled workers will be progressively achieved through programmes of off-the-job Industrial Training (OJIT), based on the module system already introduced.

(7) To cater for the smaller industries, group training schemes, encompassing both apprenticeship training and OJIT, will be developed for the upgrading of key personnel, and finally,

(8) The promotion of apprenticeship training itself will be a primary concern of the Board.

It will be apparent, from what I have just outlined, that apprenticeship schemes will feature increasingly in industrial training. The Government is giving consideration to introducing legislation to promote and regulate apprenticeship training at some future date. The Government will look forward to the views and recommendations of the Industrial Training Board, when formed, on the detailed provisions that will be necessary. It is anticipated that the legislation will cover the definition of apprenticeable trades, the forms and conduct of the training to be undertaken, and the responsibilities of both employer and apprentice, including the period of indenture. The Industrial Training Board will then become the chief agency for the implementation of apprenticeship training.

Sir, I beg to move.

Question proposed.

3.08 p.m.

Mr Sia Khoon Seong (Moulmein): Mr Speaker, Sir, I wish to inquire from the Minister for Education as to when will the Industrial Training Board be actually set up, now that the Bill is being read a Second and Third time. What are the present educational institutions that will be taken over by the Industrial Training Board? Will they be only the vocational institutes? Will they include the technical schools, the centralised workshops, and so on? What categories of teachers will be given the opportunity to exercise their option to he employed by the Industrial Training Board, and whether the terms and conditions of service will be as favourable, if not, more favourable than what they are at present?

In respect of clause 19 (h) of the Bill which states that the Industrial Training Board can carry on any trade or business, I would like to request the Minister for Education to elaborate on what trade or business that he envisages the Industrial Training Board will carry out. Will this affect the training programme of the educational institutions? There is also a provision in clause 39 which makes it compulsory for apprentices who undergo training to be insured. I would like to know whether consideration is also given to teachers to be insured also.

There is provision for teachers to exercise the option as to whether or not they want to remain in the Government service or to be opted in to the Industrial Training Board. In this respect can the Minister for Education ensure that a reasonable period will be given to the teachers to exercise the option, so that they can have a clearer picture of what their future will be when they opt? As at present, they are still vague about their working conditions.

3.12 p.m.

Mr J. F. Conceicao (Katong): Mr Speaker, Sir, may I heartily commend the Government on the introduction of this Bill. I have no doubts that the effect of the establishment of a properly administered Industrial Training Board will be a vastly improved co-ordination of all industrial training which at present seems to be in a relatively fragmented state. It can also be expected that industrial training facilities will be improved and extended. It is significant that research and assistance in research will feature as a function of the Industrial Training Board. Thus, Sir, we can expect a more systematic and rational relationship between training and the industrial training needs that can result from a better understanding of training problems.

We have been told that there will be a determination of common standards to be attained in different industrial skills and a common method of ascertaining whether these standards have indeed been attained. The problem that arises is how to encourage industries, especially the small ones to which the Minister has already made reference, to organise training for their own apprentices up to the standard set by the Industrial Training Board, or to see to the building of the skills of employees in small industries. Obviously, incentives will have to be provided. It is only realistic to conclude that many enterprises will have to be induced to take advantage of the apprenticeship training provisions, although the better the skills of the workers, the better the chances of an enterprise succeeding. Of course, the beneficiary will be the industry itself.

This reminds me of the problem that we are having over quality control. It is no use pointing out that quality control makes for profitability. There has to be a demonstration effect. Incentives have to be offered. In the case of the Industrial Training Board, in as much as there has been talk of payroll tax being used to support apprenticeship and industrial training, I would support such a measure. Indeed, perhaps an additional eventual measure will have to be provided, as what the Minister has already referred to, namely, the passage of an apprenticeship training act which will make it compulsory for industries to provide training according to schedules, schemes and conditions laid down by the Industrial Training Board.

Apparently, the Industrial Training Board will have to work out the manner in which those industries which already have general training may be able to contribute to industrial training. A careful judicious blend of a joint effort between the Government and industry will result both in the industries themselves benefiting, as well as our industrial growth receiving the good effects of such co-operation.

There are one or two other matters in the Bill which I would like to refer to, Mr Speaker, Sir. One of them is the composition of the members of the Board. I wonder what sort of people will be appointed to the Board. I would like to recommend that there should be one adult educator on the Board. The Ministry of Education is well acquainted with the people within its own ranks.

The other point which I am rather curious about is the hint in clause 5, which says that:

`There shall be paid to the Chairman, Deputy Chairman and other members of the Board out of the funds of the Board such salaries, fees and allowances as the Minister may, from time to time, determine.'

There seems to be a precedent already where this is concerned where a member of a Board is given a full salary. I would imagine that one has to determine that the job he does will be commensurate with the full salary that he receives. After all, there is already a Director on this Board, and it is stated that he is the Chief Executive Officer, so we would like to ensure that there is no duplication of authority and, of course, of salary.

Another point which I would like to refer to relates to clause 19 which, I think the Member for Moulmein has already referred to, concerns the carrying on of trade or business by the Industrial Training Board. Presumably it is something like what is being done in the Catering School, in which case there is, at the same time, business as well as training. I find it difficult to imagine that this can be applied in any other instance. But I would like some clarification from the Minister.

With regard to clause 34 (1), Sir, it reads:

`The Minister shall nominate in each year the Auditor-General or a company auditorto audit the accounts of the Board.'

I would strongly urge that if the Auditor-General is not nominated, a company auditor should be nominated on the advice of the Auditor-General, who should also give the terms and conditions on the basis of which the audit should be carried out.

Finally, I would like to ask a question in relation to a point which has already been brought up, which is that the Board will require persons who attend courses to be insured against personal injury and loss of life. Who is going to pay for this insurance, Mr Speaker, Sir?

3.20 p.m.

Dr Lee Chiaw Meng: Mr Speaker, Sir, to answer the first question raised by the Member for Moulmein, we would like to establish the Industrial Training Board as soon as possible after the Bill becomes an Act. Much depends on the various processes we have to go through. The Member also asked which institutions will come under the jurisdiction of the Board. The institutions which will be transferred to the Board will include mainly those which are involved with industrial training. These are all the vocational institutes, the Singapore Technical Institute, the Hotel and Catering Training School. The Centralised Workshop and the technical schools, as I said earlier, will remain the responsibility of the Ministry.

With regard to the staff of the institutions, they will be given the option whether to remain in Government service or to join the Board, and a reasonable period will be given to them to make their options.

On the rather interesting query about carrying on of trade or business, I think the Member for Katong has already answered the question partly. In carrying out training, there are certain products which are marketable and certain services which are also marketable. It is therefore necessary for the Board to engage in trade or business so as to dispose of these marketable products and services to bring in revenue. At the same time it serves as a sales promotion of the skills of our graduates.

Sir, it is not the practice of a statutory board to have their staff insured. I guess the best way is for the staff - I believe the Member for Moulmein will expect this from me -to take up INCOME policies themselves.

The Member for Katong touched on the question of encouraging small industries to participate in group training schemes. We have some measure of success with the SASAR group, i.e, the Singapore Association of Shipbuilders and Repairers. For these industries, we provide further education. We organise the courses to provide a uniform training syllabus and curriculum for the workers. We provide the facilities and teaching staff for the further education component and the industries provide on-the-job training. We also provide expert advice on what training should be done in their industries. We also give certain incentives to encourage people to take on apprenticeship training. There are certain financial allowances to be given to any industry which takes on demobbed national servicemen for training in certain critical trades, especially the precision trade.

The Member for Katong also raised a very interesting point about appointing an adult educator on the Board. Let me assure him that only the best people who can make a contribution will be appointed to the Board. It is with this purpose in mind that we have made a provision in the Bill to pay an allowance to the Chairman and the other members of the Board.

I agree with him entirely that if the Auditor-General is not nominated to audit the accounts of the Board, then we will take the advice of the Auditor-General on who should be the best to carry out that function.

Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read a Second time and committed to a Committee of the whole House.

The House immediately resolved itself into a Committee on the Bill.-[Dr Lee Chiaw Meng].

Bill considered in Committee; reported without amendment; read a Third time and passed.